In November, 2014, the Obama Administration announced an expansion to deferred action. The 2014 expansion was labelled “DAPA” for “Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents.”

Almost immediately, a group of 17 states, later joined by 9 others, filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas. On February 16, 2015, the Court granted the states a preliminary injunction, enjoining DAPA. This injunction will remain in place until a higher court overturns it, or until a trial is held. The injunction is now before the United States Supreme Court.

The basis of the injunction is that the Administration violated the Administrative Procedure Act by not providing notice and an opportunity to comment before issuing DAPA. The Judge did not find that DAPA was an unconstitutional exercise of Presidential power.

The lawsuit itself is probably doomed. Since 1956, every U.S. President has granted temporary immigration relief to one or more groups in need of assistance. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that this is well within the President’s authority. So, the suit appears to be nothing more than a political stunt.

However, it appears to this attorney and law professor that the Administration is performing a political stunt of its own. Why not go through the notice and comment requirements that concerned the Court, then move to set aside the injunction?

To find the answer, look at the record. This President did nothing in 2009 when he had a clear opportunity to urge Congress to propose and pass Comprehensive Immigration Reform. This President has declared Central American Women and Children fleeing their homelands to be a “threat to national security.” This President has deported more people than any other administration in history.

Don’t hold your breath for DAPA. Maybe the acronym should stand for Dead on Account of Presidential Apathy.

No, this is not a post about how to avoid the immigration authorities. It is not about status at all. If you are a non-citizen in the United States, your own poor choices could land you in immigration court. Here are some things you should be doing to keep it from happening:

1) Stay away from places where bad things happen. You know what we mean. The local nightclub where the police are called regularly. The place where the drug deals go down and fights break out. The one you wouldn’t take your wife or girlfriend to. If you and your buddies get into trouble, they will probably spend the night in jail and get fined. You will find yourself in front of an immigration judge.

2) Don’t drink and drive. Ever. This is good advice for everyone. Furthermore, Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) classifies drinking and driving offenders as enforcement priorities. Even if you don’t get placed in removal proceedings, you may find that your next application for immigration benefits just got harder to obtain.

3) Don’t do drugs, or hang around with people who do. Some laws may be changing, but any sort of drug-related conviction beyond one offense for simple possession of under an ounce of marijuana will get you deported and permanently barred from the United States.

4) If you get in a “discussion” with your significant other, tell them that they are right, and apologizebefore things get out of hand. Domestic violence offenders are also an ICE enforcement priority. Most domestic violence assault convictions are likely to be classified as “crimes involving moral turpitude.” This can have a life-long effect on your immigration status, and we don’t mean for the better.

5) Respect the Border. Crossing it illegally has consequences. If you are in the United States unlawfully for more than a year, then leave, don’t try to come back in without being inspected. The departure is a problem, but returning without inspection turns an easy immigration case into an impossible one. More cases have been screwed up by a two-week trip home to see a sick grandmother, a dying uncle, or a sister’s wedding than by anything else.

There are a number of different waivers that are used in overcoming inadmissibility in an immigration case. A few of them are simple, but most require the applicant to show hardship to family members or equities that balance out the reason for inadmissibility. A good waiver application is comprehensive, focused, and well-presented.

A comprehensive waiver application is supported by evidence for each point. For example: an applicant claims that her Lawful Permanent Resident parents will suffer hardship due to a medical condition. The evidence will establish the parent-child relationship, establish the existence of the condition, and show the effects of the condition. This could require a birth certificate, medical records, a doctor letter, and articles about the condition. The typical waiver application will involve a number of points such as this.

A focused waiver application provides evidence that is related to the basis for the waiver. For example, if hardship to a spouse is required, documenting hardship to other family members is a waste of time--unless it is shown how the hardship to those other family members will affect the spouse.

A well-presented application is organized by topic, and keyed to a brief or narrative summary. Evidence is tabbed and numbered for easy reference. The evidence is presented so that the strongest arguments are placed first, and the best evidence under each tab is on top. Highlighting is used to make key points "jump out." The overall impression should capture the government official's attention, and keep him or her engaged.

This is not a process that comes naturally to most people. This is why we recommend that individuals who need a waiver hire an experienced attorney to prepare the best waiver application possible.

Last year, the Obama Administration declared that women and children fleeing persecution in Central Amercia were “a threat to national security.” With that pretense, the administration proceeded to detain these women and children in hastily-erected concentration camps, far away from the media and access to legal assistance. It created a deportation machine designed to strip away dignity, deny legal rights, and dehumanize the same people who fled those conditions in their home countries.

This week, Republican governors and representatives are racing to block the acceptance of Syrian refugees into this country. Just like the Administration last year, they have declared these refugees constitute a threat to national security.

A year ago, on National Public Radio, I compared the actions of the Administration to the S.S. St. Louis tragedy of 1938. You can listen to the interview here: http://www.thetakeaway.org/story/un-enters-immigration-debate-over-refugee-status/ . For those who don’t know, the S.S. St. Louis was a steamship carrying Jewish refugees, which was refused entry into the United States. Our quota for the year was full. The refugees finally were accepted into the Netherlands. However, two years later, Germany conquered the Netherlands, and most of the refugees were captured and sent to their deaths in Nazi concentration camps.

Now I find myself comparing the Republican hysteria to the hysteria resulting in the rounding up and incarceration of U.S. Citizens of Japanese origin shortly after the beginning of World War II. One public official attempted to justify the current position by arguing that the Japanese internment was necessary. He received this response from Actor and Director George Takei, himself an internee: http://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2015/11/18/9758480/george-takei-roanoke-mayor .

I am not, nor have I ever been, an advocate of open borders. However, our policy toward refugees needs to be based on reason, and the values of charity, compassion, and love of neighbor. At this point in our history, we are not doing very well.

Until 2013, most applicants for residency who had lived unlawfully in the United States for more than a year faced a dilemma. In order to become residents, they had to leave the United States and apply for an immigrant visa. However, once they left, they could not return for ten years. Those who had U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident parents or spouses could apply for a waiver, but waiver processing took as long as two years. During that time, the applicant was stuck in limbo outside of the United States.

In 2013, the USCIS and the Department of State enacted a regulation which changed the process for some applicants. If an applicant had a U.S. Citizen spouse or parent, then the applicant could apply for their waiver before leaving the United States. The new process was only available if the applicant had no other immigration issues, but for many, it eliminated the long waiting period outside of the country. Now the time outside of the country was measured in days and weeks instead of months and years.

In early 2016, USCIS is expected to publish final regulations which will expand the provisional waiver to applicants who have a permanent resident spouse or parent. This expansion will affect the lives of thousands of immigrants who could not afford to spend a prolonged period outside of the United States.

If you are eligible to obtain permanent residency under any immigrant category, and have a parent or spouse who is a permanent resident, you may be eligible to apply for a provisional waiver under the new regulations. Since preparation of a waiver may take months, now is the time to act to take advantage of the expansion of the provisional waiver process. This is not a process that can be easily done without an attorney. If we can assist you in preparing your waiver, please contact us. We have been successfully applying for waivers for our clients for nearly ten years, and would be a privelege to help you.

One of my frustrations as an immigration lawyer is dealing with people’s perception that if they are the victim of a crime, they will qualify for a “U” visa. In fact, the “U” visa is not a visa for crime victims. It is a visa for victims of certain crimes (mostly related to human trafficking, although domestic violence is included) who have been helpful or are likely be helpful to law enforcement in investigating and prosecuting criminal activity. Applicants also must show that they suffered substantial physical and mental abuse as a result of their victimization.

The only way to show that a victim was helpful to law enforcement is through a Law Enforcement Affidavit. This is a USCIS form that must be filled out by a police officer, a prosecutor, or a judge. Most jurisdictions have strict rules concerning when they will execute the form, who will execute it, or both. Others will not execute it under any circumstances. Without that form, there is no case.

Once the form is completed, applicants still have to prove to the USCIS that they suffered physical and mental abuse in order to have their petition approved. This process is not automatic. Furthermore, due to backlogs, it will take years for the petition to be approved.

If you are the victim of a crime, seek the necessary professional assistance and protection. Cooperate with the criminal authorities. However, don’t think that you have won the lottery, and will automatically get legal status in the United States. That is not true for many people.